The relationship between our Churches was strained on strictly political grounds, but those issues have recently been resolved via a common declaration between the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Ethiopia (which was arranged by HH Aram I of the Armenian Church). I believe there was a recent thread wherein that common declaration was linked to.

Logged

No longer an active member of this forum. Sincerest apologies to anyone who has taken offence to anything posted in youthful ignorance or negligence prior to my leaving this forum - October, 2012.

"Philosophy is the imitation by a man of what is better, according to what is possible" - St Severus

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS

Eritrea and Ethiopian are the same exact human beings and share a common faith and history. You may say that Eritreans and Ethiopians are "ethnically" and or socio-politically divers. But even that is a stretch.

Consider the fact that both the terms "Ethiopia" and "Eritrea" are NOT indigenous terms we can see that as proof of the socio-poltical nature of these so called "two" groups of people.

The word "Ethiopia" (Ae-yi-te-o-peya) is Greek more specifically ancient Greek.

The word has no etymological meaning in the Ethiopic Languages but means "blackened by the sun which never sets" in ancient Greek. Some people have simply said that the meaning is "burnt face people". This is a mediocre overly simplistic approach to the meaning. However; the ancient Greeks (the first afro-centrics) had a deeper point buried in the term "Aeyiteopeya". They likened the "Ethiopians" to the oldest of mankind having a history far beyond reckoning (read Herodotus). The sun "never set" implies not the "sun specifically persay but more inclined to be a metaphor for a civilzation of varying cultural elements so vast and so divers and so ancient that its is likened to the "sun" (light of civilization) "that has no end" and thus its beginning can not be verified. This is hard to explain. So the ancient Greeks used the 'peya' infinitive at the end of the word to stress the vastness under consideration.

Most of us may have experienced this same unexplainable vastness which the ancient Greeks called 'pi' (3.1416 etc.). If you divide 22 by 7 you will get a number that is infinite in value or 'pi' ('peya').

'Aeyi' is likended to blackness but not the hidious, dead, bad, awfulness we find with the Germanic word 'black' (Bleck) which we are acustomed to today. Quite the contrary. 'Aeyi' implied wisdom, mystery, high spituality, holiness. God- like-ness. So while the ancient Greeks did see the deep ebony skin of the Ethiopian they did not have any other choice but to respect the grace given to human beings which have the tone of "holiness" upon them. A pious people as well in character as seen by the Greeks only helped to reinforce this view of blackness and 'holy grace'... God-like-ness. Greeks on the scene at the time maintained that the "Ethiopians" are the pious of all men and live in a land "where the Gods dwell' in various books and poetry. This was the "golden age" for Greece when she began her advance into eastern cultures and learning. This was a time when "blackness" was the highest symbol of Godliness and goodness, the highest symbol of power throughout the east and the the mediteranian world. Even in the far east. We still see remnants of this in the Orthodox Church.

Notice how the high arts of the far east still consider 'white' as inferior and 'black' as masterful. Compare a black belt to a white belt in the matial arts.

This a world dominated by eastern thought.

The west today has all but desimated this view of 'black' and reconfigured it to mean something awful and discusting and so on.

So we are dealing with a very special word "Ethiopia".

It was used first to describe all the people of what we now call Africans, blacks, negroes (archaic), colored(archaic), etc..before any of these desriptions were even in existence. These discriptions are very unsophisticated and racist designed by the worlds foremost bigots to disenfranchise and entire nation of peoples form their common link of brotherhood and heritage and their place as a people on the world stage. The results of this diabolical scheme has its greatest effects and success among the worlds university elite and the annals of academia; which of course has its impact on the masses as the "teachers" of "knowledge".

I dought I find one person on this site who believes anything I wrote here. This is my point.

There are people who want people to not associate some blacks as having anything to do with other blacks. They want to have "blacks" where they think it is most comfortable for them. Many "blacks" have also fallen into feeling and thinking this way. Especially those blacks that whites have selected to recieve a certain "honor". Some blacks in this catagory have learned to be more racist and bigoted than whites towards blacks that whites have placed in lower levels of esteem. I know this first hand; even in my own family. Its shameful.

This is behind a lot of rhe termoil among the psueso African nations. So we fight each other on the continent and off the continent. We are a troubled race; extricated from each other by the enemies of God. This is the full essence of what happened in that God foresakened 35 year war between Ethiopia the country against Ethiopians and the country of Eritrea. It is a unfortunate dicotemy.

Eritrea is a place.

The word is Latin (Italian) which has more to do with the description of the Land than any particular people who live on the Land. Like Puerto Rico (Land of riches). This phrase is not describing people but a Land.

Eritreans are Ethiopians....period.

In a broader more Orthodox since all black people on earth are Ethiopians. This is what the Greeks were saying and is the absolute meaning. It is a fact that the country known today is the Ethiopia of Scripture. This can not be confused. This is the remanant albeit very significant remanent of the once vast empire known in the old testament scriptures (biblical Ethiopia). This is geographical not racial. The people of biblical Ethiopia are the same as all other human beings on the African Continent.

Eritrea though....

If you look carefully at the culture and language they pocess the most ancient of "Ethiopian" way.

There is more to the term Eritrean that I will get into at another time.

I may have caused more confusion here; but I want all to think out of the box of what we all already think we know.

The truth is much more unblievable and harder to except.

Good thing is the ancient Greeks have a very good record that is open and available to all who choose to search out the points I made here. It is so much more I have not mentioned.

Greek names:

Aegyptos and Egypt = Khemet (KMT) indigenous word for "Egypt"

Aeyiteyopeya and Ethiopia = Khush (KSH) indigenous word for "Ethiopia" and the entire African continent including Yemen and Southern India (See Hindu-Kush mountains). Khush (KSH) is also the geographical area "Ethiopia" we know today and is the remanent of biblical Ethiopia.

A good dictionary will give you a good start with the larger meaning of the word Ethiopia.

This subject is massive. I can assure you that you would have quite a time researching this topic to try and gain the understanding I only touched on.

Like I said their is a lot of bad 'knowledge' out their which is sort of like the remaining land mines left after a war which is still causing damage to the real history and identity of the "black people" and the black world (for lack of a better term). A vastly ancient and divers world that many westerners still can not fully accept.

I have had white people tell me that I do not look black and that I am not related to certain other blacks...

Go figure?

I see this the same as saying to someone: "Owe you do not look white and you are not related to other whites". Now image that the person being told this is Russian or Georgian or Ukranian or Irish. This would seem rather silly.

Who looks white? Russians or Irish?

Fact is I am "black" and share a common brotherhood with all indeginous African peoples regardless of what is thought by whites (westerners if thats better) about what is black.

I find the same goes for white people as well. To white people are white people look white no matter how vastly different the hair, nose, head shape or stature is. All Europeans are seen as white regardless of the vast appearances.

For black people whites have developed a certain rating system to grade who is black as far as white people are concerned. White people also have a default which under the right conditons places all the black people they do not consider or to them are not black all in the same catagoryof black

This is what is happening.

So much scholarship was developed strictly from a bigoted mindset over such along time and has been ingrained into the minds of academics and thus society that most westerners (and western minded types) are not prepared to accept that they are bigoted albeit unintentionally. For the person to say that "I do not look black" was not a compliment to me it was a bigoted comment. It was very embarrassing. But that person was taught to view who is and what is black from the same system you and I were taught. I am fortunate to have had very extensive access to resources that provided me a way out this mental prison.

sadly; many of us (easterners which includes blacks) will not escape this.

Eritreans and Ethiopians are still fighting over who is who and who owns what.

Eritrea and Ethiopian are the same exact human beings and share a common faith and history. You may say that Eritreans and Ethiopians are "ethnically" and or socio-politically divers. But even that is a stretch.

Yet the Eritreans say that they are a different group. That is their perogative, it seems to me.

Quote

The word "Ethiopia" (Ae-yi-te-o-peya) is Greek more specifically ancient Greek.

I have also come across a reference to the "Book of Axum" of a man named "Ityopp'is" said to be a "son of Cush the son of Ham" who founded Axum.

Quote

The word has no etymological meaning in the Ethiopic Languages but means "blackened by the sun which never sets" in ancient Greek.

What is your source for this expansion on the etymology please?

Quote

Most of us may have experienced this same unexplainable vastness which the ancient Greeks called 'pi' (3.1416 etc.). If you divide 22 by 7 you will get a number that is infinite in value or 'pi' ('peya').

The number 3.14159...is called "Pi" because the Greek letter Pi is the first letter of the words that have come to English as periphery and perimeter. There is nothing mystical about the letter being assigned to this number and it wasn't done until the 18th century. The OED cites the mathematician Euler as referring to "Pi" in 1748.

Notice how the high arts of the far east still consider 'white' as inferior and 'black' as masterful. Compare a black belt to a white belt in the matial arts.

According to the history of Judo the system of coloured belts is a recent developement and can be traced to the founder of Kodokan Judo, Dr. Jigoro Kano in 1882. Dr. Kano first gave students black obis/belts in 1886. I would suggest that the colour symbology/means of Japan are what the idea is connected to, not so some theoretical link over thousands of miles and millenia of history.

There are many cultures and peoples that might be called "Eastern", many farther "east" then Ethiopia. The philosophy of Ancient China or Viet Nam or Japan are not the same, nor connected to countries that for *them* are "western" in direction. meaning no disrespect.

Quote

Eritreans are Ethiopians....period.

They say they are a different group. Who are you or others to tell them they are wrong or impose ideas on others please?

Quote

In a broader more Orthodox since all black people on earth are Ethiopians.

My neighbors from Cameroon would likely find that statement astonishing. You are applying an ancient label from one language, Greek, to many different peoples and cultures. The Songhay people, the Kingdoms of Ghana and Mali, the builders of Great Zimbabwe, were all different and not related to Ethiopia/Axum.

"absolute" meaning? The Greeks calling people from Africa "Ethiopian" as though they were all the same seems to me like calling the Native Americans "Indians" and acting as though they were all the same. There is a great difference between the Tlingit of the Pacific northwest, the "Pikuni"/Piegans and other Blackfeet of the northern plains, the Navaho of the Southwest, the Cherokee of (originally the Georgia/Carolinas) Oklahoma and the nations of the Iroquois Confederacy in the north eastern US. To call all by one name is not the truth.

Quote

It is a fact that the country known today is the Ethiopia of Scripture.

But that is not the same as the group/peoples called "Ethiopian" in Herodotus (who, it should be noted while being the "Father of History" was not in all cases scrupulous in documenting information let's say.

Quote

I may have caused more confusion here; but I want all to think out of the box of what we all already think we know.

The truth is much more unblievable and harder to except.

Sometimes the Truth is 'out of the box', but truth also comes from facts and history and verifiable information. Just because an idea is 'out of the box' it is not necessarily or automatically "true" and not all common knowledge is in error.

Quote

Good thing is the ancient Greeks have a very good record that is open and available to all who choose to search out the points I made here. It is so much more I have not mentioned.

Would you please provide links or book titles and author's names to back up your assertions or make the search easier please? Thank you in advance.

Is this from Herodotus that you make the claim that India and the lands north of that country are "Ethiopia"? The name of the Hindu Kush has several etymologies. One from Ibn Battuta, a Muslim traveler and writer of the mid 14th century is that the name means "Killer of Hindus" referring to a mountainous area. Another is that it comes from the Greek for "Mountains of the Indus" Caucasus Indicus. Another is that it is from the word "kuh" in Persian which means "mountain". Just because words from two different languages look or sound the same, it doesn't mean that they are the same in meaning or root or source.

I came across books that is supposed to prove that all black people look alike.

I also came across books that perport that all whites are inherently racist by nature.

Of course both of these issues are non-sense

I hope you get my point?

Also the term (terms) so generally applied to indigenous Africans and their descendants (blacks, negroes, african-americans, colored etc etc) is not (and was not) accepted by many African peoples for your information. But people like you have no problem digging out these terms and using them to make general statements or opinions about people who you seem to believe are ALL unrelated. You would be surprised to find that there is indigenous Africans for example who never heard of the word "black" even though you may refer to them as such.

The point is well of course here.

I was clear as to why I shared the facts of my history with this thread and I feel that I made my point having looked over it again.

The main point is that Ethiopians and Eritreans are the same human beings and we shall always be. We have the same religion with the Coptic Church and orthodoxy in general. Thus their is no distinction bewteen the Coptic, Ethiopian and Eritrean communities. We are one faith and one African people.

I came across books that is supposed to prove that all black people look alike.

I also came across books that perport that all whites are inherently racist by nature.

Of course both of these issues are non-sense

I hope you get my point?

Indeed such issues/books are not to be accepted. But that does not mean that all books, all works of scholarship, of history or anthropology or other subjects is "non-sense". Each work must be judged on its own merit.

I'm sorry, I don't get your point. Unless you are trying to say that there are works that are in error/wrong and that do not use good history or science or other topics. Not all books are on a equal footing. It takes discernment to find the good information and sources and to reject ones that are only the writers opinions, personal likes or dislikes or based on misunderstandings or misinterpretations.

The Scott Liddell Greek Lexicon is a standard serious scholarly reference work on that language, for example. What source do you have, please, for the etymology of Ethiopian that you posted?

Please explain your point more clearly if you would. Thank you in advance.

Quote

Also the term (terms) so generally applied to indigenous Africans and their descendants (blacks, negroes, african-americans, colored etc etc) is not (and was not) accepted by many African peoples for your information.

I don't believe that I used any of those terms in my post and I am quite aware that such terms are not universally accepted. The only place that I find I used the word "black" was in referring to the obi/belt worn by a person in the martial arts.

Quote

But people like you have no problem digging out these terms and using them to make general statements or opinions about people who you seem to believe are ALL unrelated. You would be surprised to find that there is indigenous Africans for example who never heard of the word "black" even though you may refer to them as such.

People like me? What kind of person are you under the impression that I am, please, or what would surprise me? I would refer to a person from Africa as they wished to be referred to. You have claimed that many/most persons from the continent of Africa are "Ethiopian" a name that was given to another group of people by the Greeks. I am pointing out, with references so that I am not claiming my own authority, that there were and are many groups and people who call themselves by different names.

Quote

The main point is that Ethiopians and Eritreans are the same human beings and we shall always be. We have the same religion with the Coptic Church and orthodoxy in general. Thus their is no distinction bewteen the Coptic, Ethiopian and Eritrean communities. We are one faith and one African people.

You assert that the Eritreans and other peoples in Africa are "Ethiopian". You have given no links, no book titles or authors to support this statement. It is a fact that there are human beings who call themselves "Eritrean" and say that they are not the same as "Ethiopian". One wonders if this is a case of different definitions of the word, ethnicity vs. nationality for example.

Quote

People may opt out of the above as needed. No debate required.

Thanks for sharing your little research project.

I'm sorry. Granted that reading postings on-line does not have the nuances that come with personal communication, but this reads, to me, that it is written in a contemptuous manner. "Little research project"? I was attempting to give real true information, not to put you down, not to show any contempt for *you* but to ask questions and to give other ideas and facts. That I do not agree with your opinions is, perhaps, not a reason for you to make personal remarks or put-downs.

You made assertions about points of history, groups of people, language and culture. You did not back up any of them with sources that other people could check. Some of your statements were not correct (such as the etyology of the word "Ethiopian") or were linking things that in reality are not connected. You said there was a link to the 'black belt' in martial arts when this in not the case. You said that the word "pi" was part of "Ethiopian" and was about "vastness" and infinity so that those ideas are associated with Ethiopian. It is not and I provided a link showing the historical use of Pi for an 'infinite' number.

Why should your ideas be accepted without question, please? How is it a "debate" to ask for documentation, for sources and to give other information? Why should not other people offer other information that counters your statements?

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

Indeed such issues/books are not to be accepted. But that does not mean that all books, all works of scholarship, of history or anthropology or other subjects is "non-sense". Each work must be judged on its own merit.

I'm sorry, I don't get your point. Unless you are trying to say that there are works that are in error/wrong and that do not use good history or science or other topics. Not all books are on a equal footing. It takes discernment to find the good information and sources and to reject ones that are only the writers opinions, personal likes or dislikes or based on misunderstandings or misinterpretations.

The Scott Liddell Greek Lexicon is a standard serious scholarly reference work on that language, for example. What source do you have, please, for the etymology of Ethiopian that you posted?

Please explain your point more clearly if you would. Thank you in advance.

I don't believe that I used any of those terms in my post and I am quite aware that such terms are not universally accepted. The only place that I find I used the word "black" was in referring to the obi/belt worn by a person in the martial arts.

People like me? What kind of person are you under the impression that I am, please, or what would surprise me? I would refer to a person from Africa as they wished to be referred to. You have claimed that many/most persons from the continent of Africa are "Ethiopian" a name that was given to another group of people by the Greeks. I am pointing out, with references so that I am not claiming my own authority, that there were and are many groups and people who call themselves by different names.

You assert that the Eritreans and other peoples in Africa are "Ethiopian". You have given no links, no book titles or authors to support this statement. It is a fact that there are human beings who call themselves "Eritrean" and say that they are not the same as "Ethiopian". One wonders if this is a case of different definitions of the word, ethnicity vs. nationality for example.

I'm sorry. Granted that reading postings on-line does not have the nuances that come with personal communication, but this reads, to me, that it is written in a contemptuous manner. "Little research project"? I was attempting to give real true information, not to put you down, not to show any contempt for *you* but to ask questions and to give other ideas and facts. That I do not agree with your opinions is, perhaps, not a reason for you to make personal remarks or put-downs.

You made assertions about points of history, groups of people, language and culture. You did not back up any of them with sources that other people could check. Some of your statements were not correct (such as the etyology of the word "Ethiopian") or were linking things that in reality are not connected. You said there was a link to the 'black belt' in martial arts when this in not the case. You said that the word "pi" was part of "Ethiopian" and was about "vastness" and infinity so that those ideas are associated with Ethiopian. It is not and I provided a link showing the historical use of Pi for an 'infinite' number.

Why should your ideas be accepted without question, please? How is it a "debate" to ask for documentation, for sources and to give other information? Why should not other people offer other information that counters your statements?

Ebor

Ebor

I have no issue with you personally.

When I said "people like you" it is a common use term (albeit impolite to some of us) that expresses a generalization for 'anybody' who would (or may) think or express the same or similar opinions or thoughts based on what you have 'expressed to date' only. This term does not intend to characterise 'you'. Again only your opinions on the subject are of issue when I said "people like you". You already know that I really do not know you. So such a phrase can obviously only be about what you said and not who you are. If I offended you nevertheless please accept my sincerest apologies.

My previous post was a little over spiced as well. I am sorry about that.

I offered to much information to this thread regarding "Ethiopian". My post was too broad and too complicated for most people (even someEthiopians/Africans/blacks/coloreds/negros/african-americans/Hamites/Cushites/Jamaicans/.... particulary the ones that are very proud of western scholarship and point of view). I thought that I could get away with having people like yourself take what I said for what it was worth and keep moving on the main topic. I was wrong. Some people are interested in information.

I make this mistake too often.

I am happy; very happy (surprised even) that you have taken the time to deal with this issue. You/we have strayed way off the subject; but I feel that a "side bar" (such as this) if positive is worth entertaining and I think that we have already entertained this side bar to the point to where it is exceeding its relevance to the thread in my opinion.

I suggest that we close this item here and move on.

I hope that is OK with you.

I would be happy to share knowledge about my African history with you on another thread. Maybe you can start one.

I would like to have the actual topic be revisited; which I think is a very good and productive issue.

Again thank you for you effort and the input.

I hope you continue to study the history of the African people.

I suggest>>>

Please do not presume that ALL you need (or want) to know about my history and people (or anybodies history and people for that matter) is neatly logged in some bound peices of paper; placed their by some very reliable scholar. These are sources for reference no matter how 'legit' the source. Academia has trained us to trust scholarship. I do, I do.....

But as an African proverb says:

"If you say its beef than let me ask the Cow"

The point is the Cow will most likely not have the slightest idea what "beef" is or where it comes from albeit that the Cow is very source of the fact.

Essentially the difference between Ethiopians and Eritreans is not really one of religion, nationality, or ethnicity, but one of present political reality.

Historically, most of what is today known as the independent state of Eritrea was the region of "Mereb Melash" or "Bahir Midir", ruled over by a nobleman titled "Bahir Negash" (Sea Ruler). The Bahir Negash was a vassal of the Emperors of Ethiopia. That being said it is worth noting that the Turks occupied much of what is the Eritrean coast, particularly the port of Massawa for a good 800 years. As the Ottoman Empire weakend, Egypt inherited the Ottoman possessions on the coast. In the 1870's Egypt under Khedive Ismael twice tried to invade and occupy Ethiopia but were repelled by Emperor Yohannes IV. They managed only to hold Massawa and the district of Bogos. Then much to their shock, the Mahdists rose successfully in rebellion against them in the Sudan, and the Egyptian garrison in Sudan was trapped with no way to retreat into Egypt. The British government sent Admiral Hewitt of the Royal navy to ask Emperor Yohannes to allow his enemy, the Egyptian army, to withdraw from the Sudan through Ethiopian territory to Massawa. In exchange, the British promised that in the event that Egypt had to withdraw from Massawa and it's environs, that the claims and interests of the Emperor of Ethiopia to that territory would be protected by the British. This was agreed to and signed in a formal treaty known as the Treaty of Adwa or the Hewitt Treaty, signed by Emperor Yohannes IV of Ethiopia and Admiral Hewitt on behalf of Queen Victoria. As a result Emperor Yohannes kept his word and allowed the Egyptians to withdraw from Sudan through Ethiopian territory to Massawa. This earned the Emperor the everlasting hatred of the Mahdi in the Sudan. Egypt then abandoned it's colony at Massawa, but in an act of supreme betrayal, rather than hand the port over to Ethiopia as promised, the British arranged for thier ally Italy to secretly send an occupying force through the Suez Canal and occupy Massawa. A short time earlier, the Italians had taken over the port of Asab from an Italian company that had purchased it from the Afar Sultan of Ausa, a vassal of the Emperor of Ethiopia. Deeply angered by this betrayal Yohannes found that he could do little as teh Italians encroached further and further into his northern territories. Having earned the hatred of the Mahdist, Yohannes had to fight them in a bitter war. Although he was facing a serious internal rebellion, and the Italians had occupied the town of Seatti, when he heard that the Mahdists had entered the old capital of Gondar and burned all but one of it's ancient churches, Yohannes IV dropped all his other military plans and marched west to confront the enemies of his faith. He was killed at the battle of Mettema and the Mahadists paraded his head in the streets of Khartoum.

In the confusion and isntabillity following the death of the Emperor of Ethiopia, the Italians then swept in and occupied all the land north of the Mereb river including the historically Ethiopian districts of Hamasein, Akale Guzai and Serai with their Orthodox majorities and the important monastery of Debre Bizen, as well as the largely muslim lowlands. Faced with a fait accompli, Emperor Menelik II had no choice but to recognize the new Italian colony which they chose to name Eritrea. Eritrea was reunited with Ethiopia in Federation under the Ethiopian Crown in 1951, after it was liberated from Italian Rule by the British in 1941, and then was completely reunited as a province in 1961. However, years of Italian colonial rule had given a segment of the Eritrean population (especially the Muslim population) ideas of a distinct identity from Ethiopia, and when the Federation was disolved they initiated an independence movement which culminated in a very long war of independence that ended in 1991 when the Derg regime fell in Addis Ababa.

Eritrea became independent in 1993 with the agreement of the new Ethiopian government, and they were close allies, until economic and territorial disputes resulted in another bloody war in the late 1990's.

That is why although we may live in two seperate states today, Ethiopians and Eritreans are people who have been united for centuries with common ties of religion, culture, language and everything else that unites people into one identity. We have only been seperate for a certain portion of the last 120 years.